In “Vito Marcantonio: Radical
Politician,” professor Gerald Meyer notes that, “Marcantonio's
Radical positions and affiliations engendered extraordinary
opposition. He was subject to campaigns of vilification in the
press.”
Meyer noted that, among these, was a
series of editorials published by “The New York Times,” in the
heat of Marcantonio's 1948 re-election campaign. The congressman
promptly launched the written counterattack under consideration here.
It was a difficult campaign. Two years
prior, opponents had latched onto the beating death of Republican
district captain, Joe Scottoriggio, and mercilessly tarred
Marcantonio with responsibility for the fatal dumping and with
mafiosi collusion to get it done.
Neither the mafiosi nor Marcantonio
were ever found guilty of anything and numerous investigations into Scottoriggio's death were inconclusive. East Harlem
was effectively occupied by police forces and street sweeps were
deployed for weeks after the murder in Marc's district.
There was blood in the water and the
sharks were circling. Marcantonio put paper to pen and addressed, in
the required stately terms, “The New York Times'” charges against
him.
E Tu N.Y. Times?
E Tu N.Y. Times?
“The Times” had, he wrote, “seen
fit to devote three editorial columns in the issues of Oct 12, 14 and
15 – to urging my defeat...”
The newspaper daily, he continued, “has
told its readers that my record in Congress is one of having
consistently, 'accepted, spoken for and voted for the Communist line
during the last decade.' 'The Times,' says the issue facing the
voters of my district is 'whether they are going to vote Russian or
vote American'.”
Marcantonio admitted that he had indeed
been consistent, “yes, consistent in the fight against reckless
profiteers and their marches to war; consistent in battling for fair
wages, price controls, decent housing, national health, freedom for
labor, an end to religious discrimination, Jim Crow and the like; and
for the civil rights of all Americans.”
Having put his campaign platform in
Gotham's most important daily, Marc next wrote that he, “bowed to
the felicitous phrasing of 'The New York Times' editorial, however
cynically the phrase may have been meant.”
Marcantonio spends a good amount of ink
explaining his shift in position regarding U.S. entry into the
European theater. At the war's outset he would tell crowds “The Yanks
are not comin'!”, but once German Chancellor Adolf Hitler violated
his nonaggression pact with Russian Premier Joseph Stalin, he saw
reason enough for entering the conflict.
A Majority of "Marcs"
A Majority of "Marcs"
“It is not hindsight for me to say
now,” he asserts, “that if there had been a majority of
Marcantonios in the days of the appeasement of fascism and Hitlerism,
in the days of the sabotage of collective security by the capitalist
democracies, in the days of the massacre of democratic Spain by the
Hitler-Mussolini axis – if there had been a majority of
Marcantonios in those years to call a halt to the fascist march on
the world, there would have been no World War II and millions and
millions of lives would have been saved to enjoy a world at peace.”
His change of heart occurred, he
explains, “when it became a war for the defense and security of the
American people, did indeed become a true anti-fascist and
anti-imperialist war.”
Yet the war the U.S. started out with
was not the one it ended. Stewardship of the war mattered, he
intones, for with President Franklin Roosevelt's passing, “Wall
Street and the imperialist forces of Britain took over the war,
perverted the objective of the peace.”
His complaint to the editors brings
into full relief the effort of international capital at the time to
settle the territories of a flattened European continent and quell
revolutionary situations flashing from the embers of war.
“The bipartisan policymakers seek to
rebuild the Germany which has made war on this world twice within
twenty-five years,” he continues his condemnation of the post-war
policy consensus. “They exculpate and pardon the gas-chamber
assassins of nazism and restore them to power. They favor the 'return
of colonies' to Italy and protest is heard faintly over the din of
war-making from the self-same Ethiopia which was the first victim of
fascism's last march. They provide arms and money for Greek to kill
Greek, for the thieving and fratricidal Chang Kai-shek to suppress
his peasant people.
“And in this very month, the
bipartisan policy which 'The Times' defends is now seeking to
maneuver the admission of the Spain of Franco – the Fascist,
Falangist, anti-semite butcher – into the United Nations.”
In Defense of the Italian
In Defense of the Italian
It is election season, and Marcantonio
does not let pass an opportunity to defend and identify fully with
his constituency and ethnic cohort:
“I am taxed by 'The Times' for
demanding the world relief be administered through the United Nations
rather than as the spearhead of a new policy of economic imperialism
by American big business. 'The Times' calls the attention of my
'Italian constituents' to this.
“Waste no more words on this matter:
my constituents of proud Italian birth or descent know well and
applaud my consistent opposition to the use of American taxpayers'
money to interfere in the Italian elections, as well as my genuine
concern for the restoration of a democratic and self-sustaining
Italy.”
Marc then switches from responding to
charges, to further elucidation of his own political program. The
following paragraph has the feeling of a controlled rant. It is
delivered with an anger-harnessed rhythm and matches descriptions of
his staccato style of public speaking:
“I have consistently fought for price
controls and the rationing of scarce commodities. I have supported
every decent housing measure and introduced some, hoping to give not
only the veterans, but all our people decent homes to live in
(without racial discrimination, incidentally). I have consistently
fought against Wall Street and the monopolies. This has included my
opposition to their entrenchment in the government as ordained by Mr.
Truman and promised for the future by Mr. Dewey, whom 'The Times'
supports.
“I have fought against the tax
measures that 'rob the needy to help the greedy,' as FDR so aptly
said.”
Marc's Vision
Marc's Vision
From there his politics become more a
specific vision for the country, a nuts-and-bolts enumeration of what
America might be.
“I am against universal military
training and peacetime conscription,” he wrote. “No veteran need
have this explained, nor any son, wife, or sweetheart, and yet 'The
Times' attacks me back for adhering to this historically American
position. I oppose the regimentation of Americans and the entire
American economy for the purpose of badgering any country which may
resist the economic aggression planned by the 'bipartisan' Wall
Street gang that now controls the Government.”
War and profits are continually linked
throughout the congressman's screed.
And of course, there was his role as
the last and final bulwark of trade union rights, something that
movement has too easily forgotten where Marcantonio is concerned.
Moreover, although Marc was not always the most accurate prophet –
there was no great move towards a third party in the U.S. as he
predicted – his words about the fate of organized labor ring only
too true.
“I am against the Taft-Hartley Act,
'The Times,' supports the act. The act is a deliberate and proven
instrument of destruction of labor organizations, according to Mr.
Green, Mr. Murray. Mr. Lewis and all other leaders of the working
people of America. Is it 'Russian' to be against Taft-Hartley and
union-busting? Is it patriotic to be for it?”
Witch Hunt Warning
Witch Hunt Warning
He continued his painting of a hopeful
and progressive portrait, ever vigilant of the civil rights that
empower his beleaguered constituencies, and mindful of McCarthyism.
“I am against turning my country into
a police state. I adhere to the constitutional principle that an
accused man must have an opportunity to hear his accusers and
cross-examine them. Do Mr. Truman's 'loyalty' purges include this
procedure? Is it 'blindness' to demand justice and fairness for all
alike?”
Here he adopts and almost plaintive
tone. Marcantonio does not come to the politics of poverty through a
fashion, or academia. He lives it with those around him in East
Harlem and when he makes his case here, he's making their case. Yes,
he's writing in election season in defense of his good name, but he
employs the occasion to take another at bat for his constituents, his
people.
“However much the views and actions
of mine may resemble the 'communist line' in the opinion of 'The New
York Times,' I nevertheless, stand by them. I am confident that
history and the final judgment of the people will support me in the
future as they had so consistently in the past.”
Marcantonio would win that year, yet
again, despite the specter of Scottoriggio and a nationwide
Republican sweep.
If Marc's response had an impact at The
Gray Lady, it was not enduring. In 1950, 'The Times' again targeted
him in an editorial tuned to the same key: “We shall limit our
advice in the congressional elections this year to the special case
of Vito Marcantonio...his views seem to be so remarkably compatible
wit the view of Moscow...It has long been obvious that Mr.
Marcantonio's views did not represent American thinking.”
We can be certain they knew well his
views, because they knew well his concise and cutting style of
writing. 'The Times,' simply chose to ignore the contents of its own
publicatio
"The Goodfather (A Novel): The Rising Fall of the Marvelous Marcantonio," can be found here: MARC LIVES!
No comments:
Post a Comment